Informant & His Relatives Are In Habit Of Filing False & Malicious Cases: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings
|The Supreme Court held that the FIR was registered with mala fide to wreak vengeance on the Appellants.
The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings while observing that the informant and his family are in the habit of filing false and malicious cases on account of long-standing civil disputes pending between them and the Appellants.
The Court held that the criminal case was activated by mala fide on the Respondent’s part and instituted with an “ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance” to spite the Appellants. The Bench allowed the Appeal challenging the Judgment of the Karnataka High Court which dismissed the Appellants’ Petition under Section 482 of the CrPC.
A Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran held that “The initiation of criminal proceedings at the instance of respondent No.2 in the present case is totally activated by mala fide, instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance and with a view to spite the appellants.”
Senior Advocate Anand Sanjay M. Nuli represented the Appellants, while Advocate V.N. Raghupathy appeared for the State.
Brief Facts
The Respondent had filed an FIR under Sections 448 and 506 of the IPC alleging that the Appellants had threatened him to withdraw the civil suits. The Appellants challenged the cognizance and summons issued against them seeking to quash the proceedings. The High Court dismissed the Petition, leading to the present Appeal before the Supreme Court.
The Appellants argued that the Respondent was in the habit of filing false cases.
Court’s Reasoning
The Supreme Court noted that it was clear from the record that it was the Appellants, who had filed civil suits, i.e. one for permanent injunction and the other for the declaration of the ownership of the suit property.
The Bench, therefore, held that the “respondent No.2 and his relatives are in the habit of filing false and malicious cases against the appellants only on account of long-standing civil dispute pending between them.”
“It is thus clear that the allegations in the FIR are totally absurd. When respondent No.2 has not filed any suit, there is no question of appellants threatening him of dire consequences if he does not withdraw the suit. It further appears from the record that respondent No.2 is in the habit of filing false cases against the appellants and his family members,” it noted.
The Court, however, gave a note of caution that “such powers should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in rarest of rare cases.” The Bench held that the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the Appellants would be “nothing else but an abuse of the process of law.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, is quashed and set aside. The chargesheet registered…, the order…issuing summons to the appellants and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are also quashed and set aside.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: P.M. Lokanath & Ors. v. State Of Karnataka & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 202)